Talk:Imrae
Heya. From your most recent change, I believe it may have happened in game. The player character can just kill a group of drow protecting a door to the area of the next chapter. The player can skip most of this chapter if they wish. Thus, I've tried to keep it ambiguous. ~ Possessed Priest (talk) 01:17, September 16, 2018 (UTC) :"Rumor" implies this is news, something people are telling stories about or reporting on, and it may or may not have happened. For optional events in games, it's better to just conditional statements. For example, based on what you said, I wrote "Imrae may have assigned...", which states the option without confirming whether it happened. — BadCatMan (talk) 01:30, September 16, 2018 (UTC) ::Ok, thanks. It feels somewhat odd to me to put something which may/may not have happened in an in-universe perspective history section. I'm still trying to understand the best way to do it. "X may have spared. On the other hand, X may have been killed. Actually, X may not have even been encountered in the first place". Writing like this sounds like reports of uncertain truth, i.e. rumors. :: How about storylines that branch out and develop on their own? Such as the following: "Gorion's Ward may have sought out the guild of Bodhi's vampires. Here, he may have performed some evil tasks against the Shadow Thieves and travelled to Brynnlaw. After this, they may have been assaulted by githyanki. On the other hand, he may have joined up with the Shadow Thieves, and voyaged to Brynnlaw. If this choice was taken, his group was betrayed by the sailors upon arrival and may have killed them". Is something like that acceptable? Somehow it doesn't read so great to me. Thank you for the help BadCatMan! ~ Possessed Priest (talk) 01:53, September 16, 2018 (UTC) :::No, that isn't great, but it is quite commonly done here, so I wouldn't worry too much about it. I don't think there is any perfect way to document branching narratives in an in-universe, past-tense historical way, but it is what we have to work with. :::Another approach is to leave it vague and more summarized, with language that could apply to any version of events and skipping the blow-by-blow account. For example, "Gorion's Ward may have become involved with Bodhi's vampire guild, in the process coming into contact with the Shadow Thieves and traveling to Brynnlaw." :::In some cases, canon events or sequels restrict the events of the games, so you confirm what happens and limit the branched narrative. For example, the Baldur's Gate novels are canon and their events are set in stone, so the events of the games are more optional. You can put book events in the main part of the article and game events in an Appendix Gameplay section, and discuss them from an easier out-of-universe POV. If it becomes too complex, you could shift all the gameplay stuff to the Appendix. :::A third way is to divide the history into subsections that tell the main alternate accounts in more concrete ways. I did this with Blood & Magic, for example at Howl of Vengeance. In your example, you could give the general with and against the Shadow Thieves versions. — BadCatMan (talk) 03:03, September 16, 2018 (UTC) :::: Indeed, there doesn't seem to be a perfect method; I'll try and take your approaches into the account in the future. I haven't read the Baldur's Gate novels yet, but I plan to in the long run! I'll most likely add the events from the books and elaborate on the articles at that time. Thanks for the detailed discussion and responses! ~ Possessed Priest (talk) 03:16, September 16, 2018 (UTC)